Allpar Forums banner

The future of Chrysler

313K views 1K replies 129 participants last post by  achalk 
#1 · (Edited)
When Chrysler was being reborn in the 1990s, there were definite product plans for each division, starting with flagship cars and dreamy concepts, some of which became reality.



The most popular car of this era was the Dodge Viper, an ambitious goal given the reality of the day’s Dodges; but it set the tone of what Dodge would eventually be. Another was the Plymouth Prowler, which was to lead a new vision of the brand, followed by the PT Cruiser and a restyled Voyager (Plymouth was dropped too early, and the PT was shunted into Chrysler).



As time has marched on through the tumultuous years of DaimlerChrysler, Chrysler Group, and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, three of the four brands still hold to those clear product plans. Dodge still produces performance oriented vehicles that take people back to the glory days of the muscle car era, and Jeep is clearly aimed at freedom, American spirit, and off-roading — even if most Dodges and Jeeps balance regular cars with high-performance variants (e.g., several normal Compass models and one Compass Trailhawk; or normal Chargers plus the 392 and Hellcat). Ram is clearly building trucks and vans with a broad brush of utility, luxury, and enthusiast-loved variants.

But what is the future of Chrysler?

[Because I can't get the system to synchronize properly to fix my editing errors, I am asking you to follow this link, BEFORE RESPONDING]

Read the whole post here.
 
See less See more
2
#2 ·
What Chrysler needs is Sergio or whoever will be I charge to give Chrysler brand a shot in the arm and put effort into it like they did with Alpha. 300 can be the flagship, Then they need some crossovers big time. Put tech into them and some awesome drop dead styling and quality. Bring back the Town & Country name on a big crossover. Put the Portal name on a stand out mid size hybrid crossover. Maybe a small crossover with the 200 name on it. Make an enouncement and show that they are serious !!!!!!
 
#5 ·
I never thought the 200 should have been dropped. I still see many on the roads and think they are quite good looking, contemporary cars. I understand it's an extremely competitive segment but dropping out looks like another failure for the company. To most consumer it looks like they can't compete. And that looks bad. The Chrysler brand needs some product ASAP before it becomes extinct.
 
#7 ·
Production of the 200 ceased mainly due to the transferring of products to different plants, the plant shuffle as it is known here on Allpar.

Mike
 
#6 ·
Good article Dave!

Here's what I think most people are hung up on with Chryslers brand identity; style. The term "mainstream" isn't an identity because the most mainstream vehicles in NA are pickup trucks and conservative (nee appliance) small sedans. Chrysler certainly won't have trucks and has already jettisoned the 200. Crossovers are will overtake sedans as the dominant vehicle sold so it is good that Chrysler will move into that market but as what? Mainstream? Again, what the heck does that mean? Bland, low end models that sell on volume? Unlikely since that's the antithesis of how FCA can operate as a smaller OEM. High end luxury? Nope, covered with Maserati. That leaves mid level and premium styled vehicles which, IMHO, is exactly where Chrysler has been with the T&C, 300, 200 and now Pacifica! So why all the confusion and consternation? Simply lack of new product. Pacifica has been a great addition, but it came on the heels of the 200 being unmercifully skewered than killed. Sales of the 300 keep humming along, but brothers Charger and Challenger are in the spotlight recreating an identity for Dodge. It's been rightly pointed out how Chrysler has been the only brand to get concept cars in recent years. While that's great, we all know how concepts are more likely to be dreams than reality. The upcoming crossovers in the pipeline are also great to hear, but again, FCA can and has delayed and/or cancelled products pretty far in development, so there is no guarantee at least until we see preproduction mules on the road. Chrysler and the debate on what it is and will be will continue until FCA shows, with real product, what it truly is. Till then, the void will be filled with speculation.
 
#11 ·
Yep, Mike you beat me. Nothing wrong with the 200 IMO, still nice to look at on the road. Just a calculated sacrifice.
A lot of developed and cancelled vehicles were also i guess. Likely reason for many Chinese visitors, potentially buying cancelled projects.
I can't decide how Chrysler fits in the FCA portfolio. My head conflicts with my heart when determining direction.
Portal design language does nothing for me.
If dodge continues to carry base vehicles it could cover the mainstream market. FCA has luxury brands already.
 
#12 ·
l
I can't decide how Chrysler fits in the FCA portfolio. My head conflicts with my heart when determining direction.
This is the single biggest issue that we will find for enthusiasts on Allpar.

It’s the cold hard truth, unfortunately. Chrysler is not going to be the brand it was during the times that I have loved it. Will I love it again in the future? Only time will tell...

Mike
 
#15 ·
The 300 sales are down because they haven't redesigned the vehicle for what seems like a century. I just drove through a Chrysler dealership lot and saw nothing but Jeeps and Vans. Not one 300! Don't tell me that people wont buy sedans, that is all many people want. You said it yourself, with the Charger sales increasing. Redesign the car. People (like me) do not want to spend 40k on a vehicle that looks like the one they already have just because the bumpers are different!
 
#18 ·
@redriderbob - you know this makes me want to look much closer at concept vehicles from FCA moving forward. It seems as though the designers are 5 years ahead of the production. The Portal, for instance, I had viewed as FCA just flexing their technology to the rest of the industry.

This information makes me want to take a closer look at the Portal.
 
#20 ·
@redriderbob - you know this makes me want to look much closer at concept vehicles from FCA moving forward. It seems as though the designers are 5 years ahead of the production. The Portal, for instance, I had viewed as FCA just flexing their technology to the rest of the industry.

This information makes me want to take a closer look at the Portal.
Designers usually start design work 5 years prior to a vehicle rolling off the assembly line.
 
#19 · (Edited)
Thank you for opening a conduit to vent on Chrysler.

I agree with @redriderbob about model names. Mercedes and BMW have the luxury --pun intended-- to name their vehicles whatever they want because for buyers, the equity resides predominantly with the brand much more than with their models. That's not the case with Chrysler --or Acura, Lincoln, and many others.

It is well recorded that I don't agree with the decision to drop 200. Not only in how horrible was the decision handled --or mishandled, but in that it was made predominantly on FCA manufacturing concerns, with little regard for what it did to the Chrysler brand, to its customers, to sedan buyers, and to broader marketing considerations like shopping behaviors, brand loyalty and retention, market perceptions, etc.

I am very skeptical that this repositioning of the Chrysler brand is going to work for a variety of reasons:

Firstly, the overall track record of brand repositionings is dismal, within or outside automotive. Companies that have undertaken the task of repositioning a brand normally underestimated the time, the expense and the effort required, and over-estimated its success. Chrysler doesn't stand for much in consumers minds these days, but the few things for which it continues to stand out are "luxurious", "prestigious" and "stylish". So @GasAxe is up to something when he brings up "style".

Secondly, the "vision" FCA claims to have "articulated" for Chrysler is murky at best. If consumers don't get it, from then on it is going to be an uphill battle for Chrysler.

Thirdly, FCA already has a well-established track record for screwing up re-launching brands, from the Fiat USA fiasco to the "jury is sill out" Alfa Romeo relaunch.

Knowing all this, I'd have to be an optimist fool to believe that this latest relaunch is going to work, especially under current management.

To me, the only viable options left at this point are three:
  1. Try to leverage those dormant brand perceptions, however real or imagined they are, and work to bring Chrysler back to its near-luxury past
  2. Put Chrysler out of its misery once and for all, and concentrate those resources of propping up Dodge
  3. Sell Chrysler to the Chinese or anyone else with vision and cash
Option 1 will provide the easiest, quickest path to a recovery, but its long-term viability is in question. The space between luxury and mass has been in constant assault for the past 100 years from luxury brands with the prestige to expand down-market seeking the volume they need, and from the 500-pound volume brands reaching up-market seeking the profits and the prestige they crave.

Options 2 and 3 come with their own set of political land mines, given the strong associations of the Chrysler name with American manufacturing, and the fact that the name itself is on the building.

As a Mopar enthusiast, I'd love to see FCA attempt Option 1, but I am afraid we would be back at having this same conversation in another 15 years. After that, I like Option 3.
 
#24 ·
What Chrysler needs the most is its own head honcho and not a guy leading who is splitting his time between Dodge, Fiat-us, and Chrysler.
A guy that Believes in the brand, who will set a long term strategy instead of strategy of the year, and who will work to get the resources and products it needs to suceed as a part of FCA
Timothy Kuniskis
Head of Passenger Car Brands – Dodge, SRT, Chrysler and FIAT, FCA – North America

Mike
 
#30 ·
Those sketches posted in the article are some of the early sketches for the 2017 Chrysler Pacifica. Chrysler will be a people movers brand. The 200 UF styling will go away and we will see more rounded overall shape vehicles from Chrysler with a lot more edgy lines in future product.
View attachment 9461
It's so sad Chrysler will have lost its beloved sister, Lancia, by the time. The latest Chrysler creations, be it the Pacifica or Portal, are simply awesome. At least, to my European eye. All in all, FCA has ever less and less to offer me, though.
 
#28 ·
The future of Chrysler!!?? What has changed since another foreign investor took over? I see a little but not much. I had asked, what IS this company? It's brands have been stagnant for some time. Fiat certainly hasn't produced what one would call an exciting future. Sell this off, combine this and that. They have such limited vehicle choices and their design(good as they may be), are old. Based off their market position, the future looks more bleak than upbeat. Are we going to get up tomorrow morning and find that the company or some part of it, is now owned by some other foreign investor? IMO, FCA has turned the company into a cheap suit. It would appear our only savior to rescue this mess is to have an investor buy the Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge brands away from Fiat and get order back on the table.
 
#33 ·
To me personally, Chrysler is the forefront of the brands. Not including the brands from overseas..... just specifically speaking in terms of the pre FCA era. Chrysler represents luxury, with performance, class and class-leading styling. Dodge = performance, Plymouth = performance with style, Jeep = take me anywhere I want to go. RAM = Better than most pick-ups out there, and, as time progressed, THE best...... just my opinion.
 
#51 · (Edited)
It's well documented of my disagreement of the 200 getting axed but I digress.

If I were Chrysler brand CEO... Well I have to look at the other FCA brands first. Dodge: muscle performance. Jeep: off/on road capability, SUV dominant, plays in premium market as well. Fiat: funky small cars.

Now that we have established that, where does Chrysler fit? What is the one massive disruptive trend that's becoming near future for all automakers? ELECTRIC VEHICLES. How do EVs fit in with the rest of the FCA portfolio? (Answer: they don't) So if I were running Chrysler or FCA i would be dumping all my EV and plug in hybrid vehicles straight into Chrysler brand. It literally has no real position in the market right now with only two vehicles - one of which is an aging large car and the other is a minivan... which includes a plug in hybrid! So it's not like they have to reinvent Chrysler because it's kind of a blank slate.

Frankly that's where I see Chrysler brand going: Electric. It would be stupid not to have every model coming out with a Chrysler badge to be either an all electric or plug in hybrid. Don't even bother with a gas only model.

I see why neither Chrysler or Dodge has released a new CUV. Seriously why would FCA bother when they can sell 10x as many Jeeps using the same platforms and powertrains. So you have to do something with Chrysler that breaks away from the formula the rest of the brands are doing.
 
#66 ·
While Tim is a good guy, his management of Fiat USA has been an abject failure! No debating that point.

Since Ford, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai/Kia and GM already offer hybrids of just about everything in their lineup, what will differentiate Chrysler?

All electric? Electric is still a niche player that would not exist without the penalties on fuel engines coupled with taxpayer subsidies. Range, recharging times, resale value still keep electric out of prime time.

How do you fill assembly plants with niche vehicles if you don't share lines?
 
#69 ·
Since Ford, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai/Kia and GM already offer hybrids of just about everything in their lineup, what will differentiate Chrysler?
Chrysler's will be useful and unobtrusive. The BSG will be a generation ahead of other brands' mild hybrids. The system in the Pacifica seems to be ready for the real world and already shows FCA can be taken seriously with hybrid technology.

I also doubt FCA will send an army of lawyers around to squash lawsuits like Honda did over their Civic Hybrid's glaring defects.
 
#86 ·
"Since Chrysler shares showroom space with three other brands, no brand has to have a full lineup; but someone has to fill the gap when Dodge focuses on muscle and Jeep keeps all its SUVs and CUVs off-road-ready (at least in Trailhawk trim). Chrysler has to fill the gap that remains."

Since Jeep has THREE vehicles with front wheel drive trim levels that aren't "trail ready", the only remaining gap across the board for Chrysler to fill with is the minivan.

Why waste money on a badge engineered front wheel drive "Chryslerokee"? Factor in the decade long gutting of the Chrysler brand and who would even care about it outside those of us who post here?

"A three row version of the Cherokee, modified to fit the Chrysler brand (and to take the place of the current Dodge Journey) may come within the next year to two."

Whoa....what happened to that nearly endlessly delayed Stelvio-based Journey? It's gone? Imagine that...

"The large crossover based on the Pacifica probably will not begin production until after the Grand Caravan stops, but that timeline lines up well if the 300 ends production ends a year or two later, say, in calendar-year 2020."

Ahhh, yes. "Chrysler...America's Minivan Headquarters!" YAYYYYYY!

Only thing left to do at that point is to dig up Doug Henning to tell us how Sergio made Chrysler disappear...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lee N. Burns
#89 ·
"A three row version of the Cherokee, modified to fit the Chrysler brand (and to take the place of the current Dodge Journey) may come within the next year to two."

Whoa....what happened to that nearly endlessly delayed Stelvio-based Journey? It's gone? Imagine that...
No, you're just misunderstanding. The Chrysler CUSW-based crossover was always supposed to replace the Journey. The Dodge crossover on the Giorgio-US isn't a 1:1 replacement for the Journey, hence the wording.
 
#91 ·
@Christopher I wouldn't worry, electric motors will be a phase in. ICE drivetrains will still be available. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a model without an optional engine or variant. Even the non-FCA brands who have announced they will be going full electric are actually just saying they will have full electric motors available for every model. Gas/Diesel isn't dead yet, just slowly winding down in certain areas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aldo90731
#105 ·
That was what I was getting at. I think you're going to see more automakers start to incorporate that technology into their products. However, you don't want to suddenly say we're a hybrid car maker (the Prius name has recognition) or an electric car maker (Tesla), but by offering something that appeals to buyers of both of those *and* the traditionally powered car I would think you broaden your market.


Chrysler is evolving. Some may not like the direction it is going. But it is happening. All the armchair quarterbacking in the world isn't going to change that. Are you going to embrace it or be dragged along, kicking and screaming, hoping for a chance to say "I told you so." The choice is yours.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top